TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Orders Return of Equipment; Usage Charges Dismissed Due to Lack of Rental Agreement; Appeal Partially Allowed.</h1> The Tribunal directed the Respondent to hand over a motor grader to the Corporate Debtor, which was confirmed as completed. The order for the Respondent ... Direction to Respondent to handover the asset of the Corporate Debtor, which is under the possession of Respondent since last 2 years - direction to respondent to deposit the usage charges for the above mentioned asset in the account of Corporate Debtor - HELD THAT:- The resolution plan of the Corporate Debtor has been approved on 09.08.2021 by CoC and 14.03.2022 by the NCLT. The appellant could filed its claim after the approval of plan with the Committee of Creditors, hence, the same has not been considered. The present appeal is concerned with the two directions issued in paragraph (v) as quoted above. In so far as the first direction the machine has already been handed over to the Corporate Debtor, hence, that order has been complied with - In so far as the direction to pay usage charges it is clear that there has been no rental agreement between the parties for any usage charges and machine was given to the operational creditor by the director of the Corporate Debtor in lieu of the certain dues which Corporate Debtor owe to the appellant which is reflected in letter dated 08.06.2021. The appellant could not filed its claim in the corporate insolvency resolution process of the Corporate Debtor, hence, his dues do not find any reflection - the second direction issued by Adjudicating Authority for payment of Rs. 48 lakhs is unsustainable and is set aside. Appeal allowed in part. Issues Involved:The issues involved in the judgment include directions issued by the Adjudicating Authority regarding handing over assets and payment of usage charges, compliance with the orders, resolution plan approval, claim filing, and the basis for claiming usage charges.Handing Over of Assets:The appeal was filed against the order directing the Respondent to hand over the asset of the Corporate Debtor, a motor grader, which was in the possession of the Respondent for the last 2 years. The Tribunal passed an order directing the appellant to hand over the machine within 15 days, which was subsequently confirmed that the machine had been handed over to the Corporate Debtor. The order impugned was passed in response to an application filed by the Resolution Professional regarding the handing over of the machine.Payment of Usage Charges:The Adjudicating Authority also directed the Respondent to deposit usage charges for the asset at Rs. 2 lakhs per month for 24 months, totaling Rs. 48 lakhs. However, it was found that there was no rental agreement between the parties for any usage charges, and the machine was given to the operational creditor in lieu of certain dues owed by the Corporate Debtor to the appellant. The appellant could not file its claim in the corporate insolvency resolution process, and hence, the dues did not find any reflection. The Tribunal found that the basis for claiming Rs. 2 lakhs per month as usage charges was not substantiated, and the order for payment of Rs. 48 lakhs was deemed unsustainable and set aside.Resolution Plan Approval and Claim Filing:The resolution plan of the Corporate Debtor was approved by the Committee of Creditors and the NCLT. The appellant could file its claim after the approval of the plan with the Committee of Creditors, but it was not considered in this case. The appeal primarily focused on the directions issued regarding the asset handover and payment of usage charges, with the Tribunal partially allowing the appeal by setting aside the order for payment of Rs. 48 lakhs as usage charges.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
